Why the study?
Does cardiac resynchronization therapy improve symptoms and left ventricular function in a patient with heart failure induced by LBBB after transcatheter closure of a ventricular septal defect?
Does cardiac resynchronization therapy improve symptoms and left ventricular function in a patient with heart failure induced by LBBB after transcatheter closure of a ventricular septal defect?
Cardiac resynchronization therapy can effectively reverse left ventricular enlargement and systolic dysfunction caused by persistent complete LBBB following transcatheter VSD closure.
May warrant CRT consideration in LBBB-induced HF post-VSD closure; leaves open confirmation in prospective trials.
A 54-year-old female patient with congenital heart disease had a persistent complete left bundle branch block three months after closure by an Amplatzer ventricular septal defect occluder. Nine months later, the patient suffered from chest distress, palpitation, and sweating at daily activities, and her 6-min walk distance decreased significantly (155 m). Her echocardiography showed increased left ventricular end-diastolic diameter with left ventricular ejection fraction of 37%. Her symptoms reduced significantly one week after received cardiac resynchronization therapy. She had no symptoms at daily activities, and her echo showed left ventricular ejection fraction of 46% and 53%. Moreover, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter decreased 6 and 10 months after cardiac resynchronization therapy, and 6-min walk distance remarkably increased. This case demonstrated that persistent complete left bundle branch block for nine months after transcatheter closure with ventricular septal defect Amplatzer occluder could lead to left ventricular enlargement and a significant decrease in left ventricular systolic function. Cardiac resynchronization therapy decreased left ventricular end-diastolic diameter and increased left ventricular ejection fraction, thereby improving the patient's heart functions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Du et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: